Gemini 3.7 Flash vs GLM-5.2
什麼情況選哪一個
gemini-3.7-flash 每一項都更便宜，輸入面也更寬：它接受圖像、音訊和影片加文字，輸入 $0.75 對 glm-5.2 的 $1.4，低約 1.9 倍；輸出 $3.75 對 $4.4，低約 1.2 倍；快取讀取 $0.075 對 $0.26，低約 3.5 倍。需要長單次回覆的純文字工作選 glm-5.2（它的 131072 最大輸出是 gemini-3.7-flash 的 65536 的兩倍），或者想關閉推理時也選它，這點 glm-5.2 支援而 Gemini 模型不支援。上下文 1048576 對 1000000 token 基本持平。
Benchmark 成績
兩邊都有成績的有 7 項。
供應商公布： Alibaba (Qwen) Anthropic ByteDance DeepSeek Google MiniMax Moonshot OpenAI Tencent Z.ai
定價
| Gemini 3.7 Flash | GLM-5.2 | Δ | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 輸入 / 1M tokens | $0.75 | $1.4 | 0.54× |
| 輸出 / 1M tokens | $3.75 | $4.4 | 0.85× |
| 快取讀取 / 1M tokens | $0.075 | $0.26 | 0.29× |
費率取自網站建置時的即時目錄；各模型頁面都列有最新的價目。
兩者的相對位置：每 1M tokens 的輸入價格，涵蓋同一計費單位下全部 76 個聊天模型（對數尺度）
功能
| Gemini 3.7 Flash | GLM-5.2 | |
|---|---|---|
| 工具使用 | 是 | 是 |
| 思考控制 | 是，但供應商未公布調整參數 | 可設定 |
| 結構化輸出 | 是 | 是 |
| 提示詞快取 | 隱式 + 顯式 | 隱式（自動） |
| 快取存活時間 | 未公布 | 未公布 |
| 最小快取前綴 | 4096 個 token | 未公布 |
規格
| Gemini 3.7 Flash | GLM-5.2 | |
|---|---|---|
| 輸入模態 | 文字 圖像 音訊 影片 | 文字 |
| 輸出模態 | 文字 | 文字 |
| 發布日期 | 2026-08-13 | 2026-06-16 |
| 知識截止日期 | 2026-03 | - |
| 上下文視窗 | 1M | 1M |
| 最大輸出 | 66K | 131K |
| 思考參數 | - |
|
| 可接受的值 | - | thinking.type
reasoning_effort
|
| 預設值 | - | enabled, with reasoning_effort at max: the only GLM with an effort dial, and it defaults to the top of it |
規格摘錄自各供應商的文件；供應商沒有公布的項目就直接略過，不自行推測。 完整來源： Gemini 3.7 Flash · GLM-5.2
同一段提示詞，兩個模型，經閘道實測
Gemini 3.7 Flash 通過 · 3 sentences
Enabling reasoning causes the model to generate a high volume of invisible "thinking tokens" behind the scenes to deliberate and solve complex logic before delivering a final response. Because our vendor bills strictly on token volume, this additional internal computation effectively doubled our billable output per query. In short, our costs increased because we are now paying for the extra compute capacity required to produce significantly higher-accuracy answers.
輸出 878 tok (+799 思考) 延遲 6.9 s
GLM-5.2 通過 · 3 sentences
Enabling reasoning means the LLM now generates thousands of invisible "thinking" tokens to systematically work through complex problems before producing a final answer. Because our cloud providers bill for these internal processing steps at the same rate as standard output, our billable token volume per query has doubled. While this increases our direct API costs, it drastically reduces error rates and manual review labor, ultimately lowering our total cost per resolved transaction.
輸出 1223 tok (+1138 思考) 延遲 17.1 s
是否照指令做（剛好三句，數得出來）、語氣是否貼合對象（寫給 CFO 看），以及下方 token 計量顯示出的隱藏思考計費落差。
Gemini 3.7 Flash 通過 · 8/8 cases
Here is the corrected function: ```python def longest_run(xs): if not xs: return 0 best = 1 cur = 1 for i in range(1, len(xs)): if xs[i] == xs[i - 1]: cur += 1 else: cur = 1 best = max(best, cur) return best ``` ### Explanation of the Bug The original function tracked equal adjacent transitions instead of the actual number of elements in a run, causing all non-empty run lengths to be undercounted by one (e.g., returning `0` instead of `1` for single-element lists because the loop never executes, and `1` instead of `2` for pairs). Initializing both `best` and `cur` to `1` (after handling empty inputs) and resetting `cur` to `1` on a mismatch ensures every individual element is counted as a valid run of at least length one.
輸出 1050 tok (+827 思考) 延遲 6.4 s
GLM-5.2 未通過 · 1/8 cases (fails [1])
```python def longest_run(xs): if not xs: return 0 best = 1 cur = 1 for i in range(1, len(xs)): if xs[i] == xs[i - 1]: cur += 1 […]
輸出 4097 tok (+4036 思考) 延遲 58.4 s
修正是否真的正確（跑得起來）、說明的資訊密度，以及在範圍明確的任務上的 token 效率。
Gemini 3.7 Flash 通過 · 5/5 fields, guidance "withheld"
```json { "company": "Meridian Robotics", "quarter": "September quarter", "revenue_usd_m": 412, "growth_pct": null, "guidance": "withheld" } ```
輸出 918 tok (+858 思考) 延遲 6.2 s
GLM-5.2 通過 · 5/5 fields, guidance "withheld"
```json { "company": "Meridian Robotics", "quarter": "September quarter", "revenue_usd_m": 412, "growth_pct": 11, "guidance": "withheld" } ```
輸出 1947 tok (+1893 思考) 延遲 30.9 s
是否遵守 schema（不自創欄位）、面對幻覺誘因的表現（題目明確不給 guidance），以及結構化輸出路徑的差異。
Gemini 3.7 Flash 通過 · 120 words, 0 banned, 1 question
Why pay twice for identical AI queries simply because you routed them to different model vendors? Today, we introduce Universal Prompt Caching directly within our unified API gateway architecture. This capability stores repeated prompt contexts across OpenAI, Anthropic, and local models, instantly returning stored results to eliminate redundant computation fees. When your application sends an LLM request, the gateway inspects the payload, identifies semantic matches, and returns accurate cached responses in under ten milliseconds. Engineering teams can now slash inference latency by eighty percent while dramatically reducing monthly token expenditures across diverse production deployments. You retain complete privacy control, flexible cache eviction policies, and granular metrics through a single dashboard. Update your routing settings today to accelerate overall system performance.
輸出 2858 tok (+2718 思考) 延遲 14.1 s
GLM-5.2 通過 · 120 words, 0 banned, 1 question
We are introducing Caching for our API Gateway, the smartest way to optimize your workflows. Why pay for the exact same response twice? Now, you can automatically store and reuse prompt results across multiple AI providers, drastically reducing latency and overall operational costs. If a user submits a duplicate query, the gateway serves the cached answer instantly, regardless of whether you route to OpenAI, Anthropic, or others. This directly translates to faster applications and significantly lower monthly API bills. You can easily configure your specific caching rules within the developer dashboard and watch your efficiency soar. Stop wasting your valuable tokens on completely redundant computations. Upgrade to the latest gateway version today and experience the future of intelligent prompt management.
輸出 11125 tok (+10984 思考) 延遲 114.8 s
是否遵守限制（字數上限、禁用詞清單、只能有一句問句）、文字風格的特徵，以及長度控制。
改一行程式碼就能在兩者之間切換
下面每個頁籤都列了這兩個模型 ID，要改的只有醒目標示的那兩行。端點、金鑰和請求格式都不變。
from openai import OpenAI
client = OpenAI(
base_url="https://synthorai.io/v1",
api_key="sk-syn-...",
)
resp = client.chat.completions.create(
model="gemini-3.7-flash",
# model="glm-5.2", # 取消這一行的註解，並把上一行註解掉
messages=[{"role": "user", "content": "Summarize this diff"}],
reasoning_effort="medium",
)
print(resp.choices[0].message.content)import OpenAI from "openai";
const client = new OpenAI({
baseURL: "https://synthorai.io/v1",
apiKey: "sk-syn-...",
});
const resp = await client.chat.completions.create({
model: "gemini-3.7-flash",
// model: "glm-5.2", // 取消這一行的註解，並把上一行註解掉
messages: [{ role: "user", content: "Summarize this diff" }],
reasoning_effort: "medium",
});
console.log(resp.choices[0].message.content);curl https://synthorai.io/v1/chat/completions \
-H "Authorization: Bearer sk-syn-..." \
-H "Content-Type: application/json" \
-d '{
"model": "gemini-3.7-flash",
# "model": "glm-5.2", # 取消這一行的註解，並把上一行註解掉
"messages": [{"role": "user", "content": "Hello"}],
"reasoning_effort": "medium"
}'package main
import (
"context"
"fmt"
"github.com/openai/openai-go/v3"
"github.com/openai/openai-go/v3/option"
)
func main() {
client := openai.NewClient(
option.WithBaseURL("https://synthorai.io/v1"),
option.WithAPIKey("sk-syn-..."),
)
resp, _ := client.Chat.Completions.New(context.TODO(), openai.ChatCompletionNewParams{
Model: "gemini-3.7-flash",
// Model: "glm-5.2", // 取消這一行的註解，並把上一行註解掉
Messages: []openai.ChatCompletionMessageParamUnion{
openai.UserMessage("Summarize this diff"),
},
ReasoningEffort: openai.ReasoningEffortMedium,
})
fmt.Println(resp.Choices[0].Message.Content)
}import com.openai.client.OpenAIClient;
import com.openai.client.okhttp.OpenAIOkHttpClient;
import com.openai.models.chat.completions.*;
import com.openai.models.ReasoningEffort;
OpenAIClient client = OpenAIOkHttpClient.builder()
.baseUrl("https://synthorai.io/v1")
.apiKey("sk-syn-...")
.build();
ChatCompletion resp = client.chat().completions().create(
ChatCompletionCreateParams.builder()
.model("gemini-3.7-flash")
// .model("glm-5.2") // 取消這一行的註解，並把上一行註解掉
.addUserMessage("Summarize this diff")
.reasoningEffort(ReasoningEffort.MEDIUM)
.build());
System.out.println(resp.choices().get(0).message().content().orElse(""));常見問題
Gemini 3.7 Flash 和 GLM-5.2 哪個比較便宜？
以「輸入 / 1M tokens」來看，Gemini 3.7 Flash 比較便宜（$0.75 對 $1.4，相差 1.9×）。其他項目的結果可能相反，完整價目請看上表；實際成本要看你的用量組合。
可以只串接一次，就對 Gemini 3.7 Flash 和 GLM-5.2 做 A/B 測試嗎？
可以。兩個模型都走同一個 OpenAI 相容端點，用的也是同一把 API 金鑰，切換時只要改一行裡的模型名稱字串。你可以把一部分流量分別導到兩邊，再直接比較帳單。
Gemini 3.7 Flash 與 GLM-5.2 支援提示詞快取嗎？
支援。兩者的快取讀取費率都低於輸入費率，所以前綴已經進快取的工作負載，實際成本會比官網價算出來的低。確切的快取讀取價格請見上方定價表。